Officer estimates enough for speeding convictions

AP ^ | 6/2/10 | Staff

[Paladin2]

I’ve seen a LEO nab two at a time.

[Adder]

Ohio’s highest court has ruled that a person may be convicted of speeding purely if it looked to a police officer that the motorist was going too fast.

Hmmm: that looks like an effed up ruling.
I guess according to their logic, it is.
Unbelievable.

And 5-1, yet.

Thou are truly shLtting me.

[Osage Orange]

Well, of course that makes too much sense.

You are banned!!

[Xenalyte]

Just for my own curiosity, is there a reason you put a space before punctuation marks?

It renders you less readable.

[TChris]

So the defendent has to prove his innocence rather than the accuser proving guilt.

The burden of proof shifts back and forth depending upon the evidence. Once the prosecution has overcome your presumed innocence and established a prima facie case, establishing at least the minimum case required to convict, then it's the defense's burden to prove the prosecution wrong.

This ruling says that a trained officer's speed estimate meets the requirement for a prima facie case of speeding. Without any proof to the contrary from the defense, it's enough to convict.

If, for example, there were three witnesses in the vehicle who all testify that the vehicle's speedometer, or a GPS receiver on the dashboard, indicated a speed at or below the current speed limit at that time, then that testimony might outweigh the officer's estimate.

[CSM]

“But this ruling means the burden of proof would be on the defense to show that the officer’s estimate was wrong.”

In other words, the defense is now carrying the burden to prove innocense.......

If this is such a good decision, why not just allow the officers to write down plate numbers to mail tickets later. Then they could get the multiple speeders and not be bound by their discression to pull one over instead of another...

[kbennkc]

If they were that good at it, then they would sweep down TWO cars when both are speeding rather than cutting the faster car loose.

Please be careful what you wish for .

[VRW Conspirator]

The Ohio Supreme Court ruled Wednesday that an officer's visual estimation of speed is enough to support a conviction if the officer is trained, certified by a training academy, and experienced in watching for speeders.

And how does an individual get trained in observing abuse of power, tyranny, your honor?

[kbennkc]

Ohio Supreme Court protects its own - one of the female members had multiple DUIs, tried to use her official power to intimidate the arresting officers, and STILL kept her seat on the bench.

Maybe you need smarter voters come retention time .

[LadyBuck]

>>Maybe you need smarter voters come retention time<<

No kidding - Senator Sherrod Brown is a prime example of the need for smarter voters.

PS - haven’t lived there for 5 years (I’m now in the cesspool of the PROI - people’s republic of Iowa -and Iowa’s almost as bad)

[kbennkc]

Were those the devices known as “tattlers”?

I never heard that term used , just "tach charts" or "clocks" , I don't remember the official name of the instrument Tach-o-Graph or something . They were accurate , so if you were trying to avoid the truth , tattler would be correct . They saved many drivers from being wrongly convicted of vehicular homicide .

[kbennkc]

I’ve seen a LEO nab two at a time.

I have been a nabee , party of two .

[TChris]

In other words, the defense is now carrying the burden to prove innocense.......

Yes, that's the way trials have always worked. This ruling isn't changing any of that. Once the prosecution overcomes the presumption of innocence and establishes its case sufficiently (prima facie), it's then the defense's burden to prove them wrong.

All this case does is say that an officer's speed estimate can be used to establish the prosecution's case. It's evidence like any other, and can be overcome if the defense has something better.

The court ruling just says that a trained, experienced officer's speed estimate is more than a wild guess and can be used as prima facie evidence. If there's something more accurate available which contradicts his estimate, or if he is a proven perjurer, etc. etc., then the officer's estimate might not carry much weight at trial.

If a particular officer abused this credibility and got slammed a few times at trial, then his estimates would quickly lose any value in the future.

[fr_freak]

I can tell you from personal experience as a LEO that you can estimate a vehicle's speed within +/- 2 to 3 MPH after a year of traffic duty.

Wrong. You can testify from personal experience that you, yourself, are able to estimate speed within +/- 2 or 3. You really don't have any idea how many of your fellow officers are able to do so with that kind of accuracy. Let's assume that 25% can't - that means incorrect or false speeding tickets 25% of the time. Should we be happy with that?

[Paladin2]

The first one tried to escape following the nab of the second.

Didn't work.

First sucka got chased down again. Pretty funny. It wuz a MD State Popo on the Eastern Shore. Decades ago.

[TChris]

Let's assume that 25% can't - that means incorrect or false speeding tickets 25% of the time. Should we be happy with that?

If an officer's estimates are that inaccurate, then he will lose cases in court and stop getting any convictions. Those officers soon find it difficult to find work.

If you provide multiple witnesses who testify that the GPS receiver on your dashboard indicated a speed significantly lower than the officer's estimate, or some other strong evidence, then you could beat the officer's testimony.

The point is that a trained officer will likely have a documented accuracy for his estimates. That's going to stand up in court unless you contradict him with something stronger.

[kbennkc]

Just for my own curiosity, is there a reason you put a space before punctuation marks? It renders you less readable. thanks for your correction.I had never typed before,that was why secretaries were my favorite people.My first day on FR people told me to do so,but perhaps I have never done it right.I invite constructive advice.Is this better?I couldn't go on living if you skip over me.I am stupid anyway.

[WOBBLY BOB]

At 205 MPH, Speed Thrills
Minnesota biker cited for driving 140 mph over limit

http://www.thesmokinggun.com/archive/0922042speed1.html

“I estimate you were in warp drive.”

[Xenalyte]

You’re not stupid at all! Your posts on this thread - which I think is the only place I’ve seen you so far - are quite insightful.

(The space goes after the punctuation mark, not before.)

[TankerKC]

But this ruling means the burden of proof would be on the defense to show that the officer's estimate was wrong.

And you think that's ok?